Sneed v. State
| Decision Date | 05 January 2000 |
| Docket Number | No. 98-2111.,98-2111. |
| Citation | 749 So.2d 545 |
| Parties | Ronald SNEED, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
749 So.2d 545
Ronald SNEED, Appellant,v.
STATE of Florida, Appellee
No. 98-2111.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
January 5, 2000.
Richard L. Jorandby, Public Defender, and Ian Seldin, Assistant Public Defender, West Palm Beach, for appellant.
Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Ettie Feistmann, Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellee.
WARNER, C.J.
A jury found appellant guilty of attempted possession of cocaine and possession of drug paraphernalia. Immediately after the verdict, the trial court adjudicated appellant guilty of both offenses, and thinking both charges were misdemeanors sentenced the appellant to time served with
Although the appellant did not raise a double jeopardy challenge at the trial level to his resentencing, a violation of double jeopardy principles is fundamental error and may be raised for the first time on appeal. See Acosta v. State, 489 So.2d 63, 63 n. 1 (Fla. 4th DCA 1986)(citing State v. Johnson, 483 So.2d 420, 422 (Fla.1986)). In the instant case, the court adjudicated the appellant and sentenced him to time served. Thus, by the time the court realized its mistake, appellant's sentence had already been served. Moreover, where a sentence has already been served, even if it is an illegal sentence, the court lacks jurisdiction and would violate the Double Jeopardy Clause by resentencing the defendant to an increased sentence. See Palmer v. State, 182 So.2d 625, 626-27 (Fla. 4th DCA 1966); cf. United States v. Silvers, 90 F.3d 95, 101 (4th Cir.1996). In Palmer, this court quoted with approval from 8 R.C.L., Criminal Laws, § 247 that:
"Where a judgment has been fully satisfied by the defendant, the trial court has no power to amend it by increasing the punishment after the term at which the judgment was rendered, or even during the same term. The ends of justice will not be served by permitting the state, after the sentence of the law has been discharged, to open the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Pate v. State, 2D05-1086.
...Willingham v. State, 833 So.2d 237, 238 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002); I.B. v. State, 771 So.2d 1258, 1259 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000); Sneed v. State, 749 So.2d 545, 546 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000); see also Rivera, 862 So.2d at 56 (adding a probation term inadvertently omitted during pronouncement of the sentence ......
-
Clark v. State
...defendant to an increased sentence.” Maybin v. State, 884 So.2d 1174, 1175 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004) (emphasis added) (citing Sneed v. State, 749 So.2d 545 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000)). ...
-
Martin v. State
... ... as to which defendant's sentence had been fully served); ... Commonwealth v. Cole , 10 N.E.3d 1081, 1095 (Mass ... 2014) (where defendant already served the original sentence, ... resentencing would violate principles of double ... jeopardy); Sneed v. State , 749 So.2d 545, 546 (Fla ... Dist. Ct. App. 2000) ("[W]here a sentence has already ... been served, even if it is an illegal sentence, the court ... lacks jurisdiction and would violate the Double Jeopardy ... Clause by resentencing the defendant to an increased ... ...
-
State v. Houston
...1966) (applying the rule to a completed term of probation); People v. Williams, 925 N.E.2d 878, 888-89 (2010); Sneed v. State, 749 So.2d 545, 546 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2000). Our supreme court has discussed double jeopardy principles (but without discussing the validity of the sentence) in d......